Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Syria Conflict: 'chemical Attack' In Idlib Kills 58
http://
Its seems that this was yet another chemical attack, which is supposed to be illegal.
And why are the Russians and Syrians deliberately attacking local clinics treating victims of the chemical attack ?
Its seems that this was yet another chemical attack, which is supposed to be illegal.
And why are the Russians and Syrians deliberately attacking local clinics treating victims of the chemical attack ?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The question, if I read it correctly, was not "let's overthrow Assad"
It's why does the Syrian regime consistently deliberately target civilians in its "war on terrorists".
And the answer, as I said before, is: because, quite simply, it works.
If it was counter-productive then they wouldn't do it. Assad has one objective: stay in power. Russia similarly has one objective, namely keep Assad in power. And how do you stay in power? Kill anyone who questions you. Simples.
It's why does the Syrian regime consistently deliberately target civilians in its "war on terrorists".
And the answer, as I said before, is: because, quite simply, it works.
If it was counter-productive then they wouldn't do it. Assad has one objective: stay in power. Russia similarly has one objective, namely keep Assad in power. And how do you stay in power? Kill anyone who questions you. Simples.
Yeah, put words in my mouth eh Mickey?
Personally I dont have the full facts. Clearly you do so you are at an advantage to me.
Do I condone chemical attacks, no I dont.
Do I condone attacks on children, no I dont.
But war is terrible, mistakes and 'atrocities' will always take place.
And it is no good just whining, you didn't answer my question on how you think we should deal with it?
Personally I dont have the full facts. Clearly you do so you are at an advantage to me.
Do I condone chemical attacks, no I dont.
Do I condone attacks on children, no I dont.
But war is terrible, mistakes and 'atrocities' will always take place.
And it is no good just whining, you didn't answer my question on how you think we should deal with it?
" you didn't answer my question on how you think we should deal with it? "
Allow me to have a go at that, since your original question sounded rather rhetorical: it is long past the stage where we are in a position to "do anything about it" It doesn't negate the value tho of asking why do these war crimes take place.
Allow me to have a go at that, since your original question sounded rather rhetorical: it is long past the stage where we are in a position to "do anything about it" It doesn't negate the value tho of asking why do these war crimes take place.
-- answer removed --
Extraordinarily, the White House press spokesman has blamed the 'weakness and irresolution' of the Obama administration for 'emboldening' Assad.
No kind of 'emboldening' then from the current administration's recent announcement that the US would stop insisting in the bringing of Assad to an international war crimes court, and basically just let him carry on, obviously ...
No kind of 'emboldening' then from the current administration's recent announcement that the US would stop insisting in the bringing of Assad to an international war crimes court, and basically just let him carry on, obviously ...
Russia now says this was an attack on a rebel munitions store containing sarin for use in Iraq.
That would appear to be a cynical lie. Photos of the scene show holes in the road, added to which there is no sign of a fire at the scene which a bomb attack on a munitions store would surely cause.
Added to which, surely such an attack would actually destroy said nerve agent. And if it wouldn't, surely it would be a reckless thing to do anyway.
That would appear to be a cynical lie. Photos of the scene show holes in the road, added to which there is no sign of a fire at the scene which a bomb attack on a munitions store would surely cause.
Added to which, surely such an attack would actually destroy said nerve agent. And if it wouldn't, surely it would be a reckless thing to do anyway.
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
How it Works4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles25 mins ago
ChatterBank198 mins ago
Horror As 'Man Doused In Bleach' In Busy...
News274 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.